51
51
Dec 9, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 51
favorite 0
quote 0
doma cases are slightly different. i think the doma challenge is much narrower challenge and i expect it to be much more optimistic about a kind of flat-out ruling that this is unconstitutional by the supreme court. the reason i think that, melissa, doma doesn't require any state to change its marriage laws. all it says is the federal government is going to return to what the federal government was always doing before. we were talking about federalism issues earlier in the show. in the history of marriage, the federal government has always deferred to state definitions of marriage. let me give you an example. some states allow first cousins to marry, others don't because of prohibitions, incest concerns and things like that. whatever the state definitions are, the federal government has always followed the state definition. if a state says they're married, the federal government says for the purposes of benefits they're married. in 1996, the defense of marriage act departed from that practice and said the federal gover
doma cases are slightly different. i think the doma challenge is much narrower challenge and i expect it to be much more optimistic about a kind of flat-out ruling that this is unconstitutional by the supreme court. the reason i think that, melissa, doma doesn't require any state to change its marriage laws. all it says is the federal government is going to return to what the federal government was always doing before. we were talking about federalism issues earlier in the show. in the history...
83
83
Dec 9, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 83
favorite 0
quote 0
one is doma, defense of marriage act. this administration won't defend it in the courts. if that gets struck down, what does that say to cases where people have been allowed to marry in the same gender. what happens if doma gets struck down by the court, 5-4, whatever. >> the ridiculously named defense of marriage act would be gone. >> what would it mean to a person married? >> that would bemean couples married in those states would be recognized by the federal government. would mean we still have a lot of work to do and depending how they rule in the prop 8 case we still need other states to move forward with the right to marry. >> an honor to have you on and elizabeth, glad to have you back in a much bigger studio now. the republican establishment at war with his crazy wing, said they lost election because i ideologues pulled mitt romney too far to the right. wrong says the right ring, we lost because mitt romney wasn't right wing enough. the winner will determine whether the gop returns to the center or becomes a more fringy party. >>> two people get in the room. the p
one is doma, defense of marriage act. this administration won't defend it in the courts. if that gets struck down, what does that say to cases where people have been allowed to marry in the same gender. what happens if doma gets struck down by the court, 5-4, whatever. >> the ridiculously named defense of marriage act would be gone. >> what would it mean to a person married? >> that would bemean couples married in those states would be recognized by the federal government....
146
146
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 146
favorite 0
quote 0
what happens it doma gets struck down by the court, 5-4 or whatever? >> the ridiculously named defense of marriage act would be gone obviously. >> what would it mean to a gay person who is married? >> that would mean that couples who are married in those states as well as the district of columbia, their marriages would be recognized by the federal government. now, it would mean we still have a lot of work to do, and depending on how they rule in the prop 8 case, we would still need other states to move forward with the right to marry. >> right. >> thank you. it's an honor to have you on and your organization. elizabeth birch, we are in a much bigger studio. >>> the republican establishment is at war with its crazy wing. they say they lost the election because ideologues pulled mitt romney foo far to the right. that sounds reasonable. wrong says the right wing. we lost because mitt romney wasn't right wing enough. the winner of this little tango will determine whether the gop moves to the center where it might find some votes or becomes an even more fri
what happens it doma gets struck down by the court, 5-4 or whatever? >> the ridiculously named defense of marriage act would be gone obviously. >> what would it mean to a gay person who is married? >> that would mean that couples who are married in those states as well as the district of columbia, their marriages would be recognized by the federal government. now, it would mean we still have a lot of work to do, and depending on how they rule in the prop 8 case, we would still...
160
160
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 160
favorite 0
quote 0
what doma says is two things. one state does not have to recognize the marriage law, same-sex marriage law, of another state. that would be struck down and then there would have to be another test as to full faith and credit. >> if you move from california to utah and you're getting the recognized marriage in california but not in utah, but in utah living in salt lake city you'd be able to get social security benefits and all the federal stuff. >> you would -- it's not clear. >> it would depend how the court rules in that case. >> if the court reaches the question of full faith and credit, what that is, utah must recognize the marriage laws of california, then, yes -- >> but you'd still be getting your social security checks, wouldn't you? >> it's not clear -- >> let's go back to a clear case. if prop 8 -- if the decision by the ninth , if the decision to strike that down, if that is upheld, where do we stand? what does that do? is equality then the law of the land? is marriage equality the law of land? >> it woul
what doma says is two things. one state does not have to recognize the marriage law, same-sex marriage law, of another state. that would be struck down and then there would have to be another test as to full faith and credit. >> if you move from california to utah and you're getting the recognized marriage in california but not in utah, but in utah living in salt lake city you'd be able to get social security benefits and all the federal stuff. >> you would -- it's not clear....
208
208
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 208
favorite 0
quote 0
ruling in favor of the arc of history and civil rights, given the fact that they're taking up both doma and prop 8. i wonder where you think roberts fits into all this. >> based on some of the other decisions he has made, i don't think he is quite as conservative as some people think. i think taking up the doma case is really important because we really need to have the defense of marriage act struck down. marriage in the states is great. but at the end of the day, there is an awful lot of benefits that come from the federal tax code, that people who get married need to enjoy if you're going to have a fair and equitable situation in society. so i think they made a big step forward here. and, you know, the court is a hard place to read. unfortunately, it's not like the election. well don't have nate silver to read every morning to tell us how it's going to turn out. but we'll all be watching closely. >> chris, there is a third issue that the justices haven't taken up yet, and that's an arizona law that bars some same-sex spouses from access to state benefits. where do we go on that? what
ruling in favor of the arc of history and civil rights, given the fact that they're taking up both doma and prop 8. i wonder where you think roberts fits into all this. >> based on some of the other decisions he has made, i don't think he is quite as conservative as some people think. i think taking up the doma case is really important because we really need to have the defense of marriage act struck down. marriage in the states is great. but at the end of the day, there is an awful lot...
146
146
Dec 10, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 146
favorite 0
quote 0
when the supremes get down to assessing doma, we can expect the conservatives to defend doma and the liberals to strike it down. the comp significance of the majority will be determined by the votes of chief justice roberts who has shown he's willing to leave the conservatives if he feels the court's legacy is in peril and kenne kennedy. he wrote the constitution prohibits laws singling out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status. it appears doma will get tossed in the dust bin of history. the courts other gay rights case comes from california which gave gays the right to marry and then with proposition 8 took it away. taking away an existing right because of animus was prohibited by the court in a '96 decision authored by justice kennedy. but where the doma case asks can the federal government discriminate against married couple, the prop 8 case asks can states bar gays from marrying. kennedy
when the supremes get down to assessing doma, we can expect the conservatives to defend doma and the liberals to strike it down. the comp significance of the majority will be determined by the votes of chief justice roberts who has shown he's willing to leave the conservatives if he feels the court's legacy is in peril and kenne kennedy. he wrote the constitution prohibits laws singling out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status. it appears doma will get tossed in the dust bin...
190
190
Dec 7, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 190
favorite 0
quote 1
so i think that doma law goes by the wayside. the second question is an equal protection question and goes specifically at the california referendum which -- >> the proposition 8. >> the proposition, proposition 8, which makes it illegal under california law to have gay marriage. they will look at that under the equal protection clause. i think it's a little bit hazardous to anticipate where the court will go on that question, and i would be reluctant to do that, but that's kind of an equal protection question. the request he is will the court be ahead of where the public is or behind the public. this is a question that eventually sooner or later, probably sooner, the public will come around to recognize and already is showing by the polls that marriage equality should be considered a fundamental constitutional right. >> professor peterson, to julian's point, despite its rulings on the president's health care law, on immigration, this court maintains a conservative tilt. is this necessarily good news for supporters of same-sex ma
so i think that doma law goes by the wayside. the second question is an equal protection question and goes specifically at the california referendum which -- >> the proposition 8. >> the proposition, proposition 8, which makes it illegal under california law to have gay marriage. they will look at that under the equal protection clause. i think it's a little bit hazardous to anticipate where the court will go on that question, and i would be reluctant to do that, but that's kind of...
160
160
Dec 10, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 160
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> i've heard from the justice department on doma and not with prop 8 and makes it all the more curious. >> the justice department has, again, had a leadership position on overturning the defensive marriage act but if you take the legal position they have advocated in the defensive marriage act cases and you apply it to a situation like proposition 8, all of those anti-gay laws go by the wayside and really a question of them taking the arguments they made in one case and making them again in this other case. >> i want to read from an associated press article on the fear and hope some have regarding gay marriage. gay marriage supporters see 41 reasons to fret over the supreme court's decision to take up the case of california's man on same sex issues and nine states allow partners to marry or will soon. 41 states do not. of those, 30 have written gay marriage bans into their state's constitution. >> i'm not that worried and the reason is because i think that the supreme court would have only taken these cases if they thought that they were ripe for a decision that moves the country forwa
. >> i've heard from the justice department on doma and not with prop 8 and makes it all the more curious. >> the justice department has, again, had a leadership position on overturning the defensive marriage act but if you take the legal position they have advocated in the defensive marriage act cases and you apply it to a situation like proposition 8, all of those anti-gay laws go by the wayside and really a question of them taking the arguments they made in one case and making...
160
160
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 160
favorite 0
quote 0
so with a doma case, it's like justice kennedy's most favorite things. because justice kennedy loves state power. >> loves state's rights. ? and he loves gay rights because of the 1996 case and the 2003 case, both of which he authored the opinion that upheld the rightings of lgbtv individuals. the doe ma case is like the perfect convergence of those two strands so, that's why i'm so confident about the doma case because it's a state's rights case in the sense that the federal government is meddling with the state definitions of marriage. with respect to the prop 8 case, i think again kennedy, because of these two cases i mentioned, is likely to be sympathetic but may be incremental. he may say something along the lines of one state or eight states have to flip. i don't think he'll flip all 41. >> we always appreciate your valuable insight. we hope you'll stick around for the next few months and continue to provide that as we wade through what is undoubtedly going to be a fairly complex case, as well. good saturday to you, sir. thank you for your time. >>
so with a doma case, it's like justice kennedy's most favorite things. because justice kennedy loves state power. >> loves state's rights. ? and he loves gay rights because of the 1996 case and the 2003 case, both of which he authored the opinion that upheld the rightings of lgbtv individuals. the doe ma case is like the perfect convergence of those two strands so, that's why i'm so confident about the doma case because it's a state's rights case in the sense that the federal government...
154
154
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 154
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court will now be looking at both prop 8 and doma. this could potentially be huge for gay rights in america. >> especially with david boyes and ted olson coming together, the guys who were against each other in bush v gore, on the same side fighting for gay rights, for gay marriage. i think it's a really interesting case because they designed this case not to kind of be technical but just to go at the straight heart of the issue which is whether not letting gay people marry is discrimination. so it's a pretty direct hit on whether this is allowed or not, and i think they have a really good chance of winning this and kind of basically deciding this once and for all. which is the way this is going to move forward. this isn't the way civil rights get decided, they get decided by our courts because the constitution is designed to protect people's rights. >> i completely agree. i think the state by state element of this just can't wash for much longer. it has to be done at a national level. where will that leave the members of the republic
the supreme court will now be looking at both prop 8 and doma. this could potentially be huge for gay rights in america. >> especially with david boyes and ted olson coming together, the guys who were against each other in bush v gore, on the same side fighting for gay rights, for gay marriage. i think it's a really interesting case because they designed this case not to kind of be technical but just to go at the straight heart of the issue which is whether not letting gay people marry is...
89
89
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 89
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court will now be looking at both prop 8 and doma. this could potentially be huge for gay rights in america. >> especially with david boyes and ted olson coming together, the guys who were against each other in bush v gore, on the same side fighting for gay rights, for gay marriage. nnounc] take dayquil... [ ding! ] ...and spend time on the slopes. take alka-seltzer plus cold & cough... [ buzz! ] ...and spend time on the chair. for non-drowsy 6-symptom cold & flu relief. take dayquil. a regular guy with an irregular heartbeat. the usual, bob? not today. [ male announcer ] bob has afib: atrial fibrillation not caused by a heart valve problem, a condition that puts him at greater risk for a stroke. [ gps ] turn left. i don't think so. [ male announcer ] for years, bob took warfarin, and made a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but not anymore. bob's doctor recommended a different option: once-a-day xarelto®. xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a he
the supreme court will now be looking at both prop 8 and doma. this could potentially be huge for gay rights in america. >> especially with david boyes and ted olson coming together, the guys who were against each other in bush v gore, on the same side fighting for gay rights, for gay marriage. nnounc] take dayquil... [ ding! ] ...and spend time on the slopes. take alka-seltzer plus cold & cough... [ buzz! ] ...and spend time on the chair. for non-drowsy 6-symptom cold & flu...
139
139
Dec 10, 2012
12/12
by
CURRENT
tv
eye 139
favorite 0
quote 0
or would, if the supreme court rules against doma. >> if the supreme court rules against doma, nothing changes. >> if they rule for california? >> uh-huh. >> how about all of those other state constitdeletions? automatically invalid dated. >> the 9th circuit, when they decided the case they ruled very narrowly. they said because california had the right, california same-sex couples had the right to marry. then it was taken away from them, that this was similar to the 1996 supreme court case when the colorado voters had amended their constitution and it was a case rommer versus evans in which the voters had taken away ability for any city in colorado to have a non-discrimination policy based upon sexual orientation. the court there had said you can't take away people's rights to enter the system. >> bill: the court could say it's up to the states? >> the court could say you can't take away rights. >> bill: uh-huh. >> you have already granted. that would only impact the state of california. but they could also say that the 14th amendment to the constitution guarantees fundamental rights
or would, if the supreme court rules against doma. >> if the supreme court rules against doma, nothing changes. >> if they rule for california? >> uh-huh. >> how about all of those other state constitdeletions? automatically invalid dated. >> the 9th circuit, when they decided the case they ruled very narrowly. they said because california had the right, california same-sex couples had the right to marry. then it was taken away from them, that this was similar to...
151
151
Dec 9, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 151
favorite 0
quote 1
let's start with doma. if that is struck down by the high court, thewill that be thed of conservatives' attempts of outlawing gay marriage? >> it is the mother of all federal laws to try to outlaw. it will be over it it's overturned. if social conservatives try to get smart about this stuff, looking for opportunities to play defense instead of offense, doma, which is a terrible law in my estimation, was an attempt to completely play offense. you can't do this anywhere in any state. we're going to pre-empt you before you try. i think social cons are in a much better position when they say, look, let's make it so the government can't compel us to do things privately we don't want to do. i think you'll see much more emphasis placed on that. the question will be more than what will the supreme court try to do because they don't want to be out in front of public opinion too much. it's going to be fascinating. >> and they've rarely been accused of doing that either. david, let's move on to prop 8 in california. i
let's start with doma. if that is struck down by the high court, thewill that be thed of conservatives' attempts of outlawing gay marriage? >> it is the mother of all federal laws to try to outlaw. it will be over it it's overturned. if social conservatives try to get smart about this stuff, looking for opportunities to play defense instead of offense, doma, which is a terrible law in my estimation, was an attempt to completely play offense. you can't do this anywhere in any state. we're...
228
228
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 228
favorite 0
quote 0
cheryl harris says "i think doma women get shut down quickly on solid legal grounds. prop 8 harder but kennedy will clear it up." >>> next the tug-of-war over the fiscal cliff. how much are democrats willing to give our entitlement cuts? we'll ask congressman elijah cummings that question. >>> the fight on capitol hill convinces a big powerball winner to claim his fortune now. you're watching "weekends with alex witt." [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. in what world do potatoes, bacon and cheese add up to 100 calories? your world. ♪ [ whispers ] real bacon... creamy cheese... 100 calories... [ chef ] ma'am [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. i tell them dentures are very different to real teeth. they're about 10 times softer and may have surface pores where bacteria can grow and multiply. polident is specifically designed to clean dentures daily. its unique micro-clean formula kills 99.9% of odor causing bacteria and helps dissolve stains, cleaning in a better way than brushing with toothpaste. that's why i recommend using polident. [ male announ
cheryl harris says "i think doma women get shut down quickly on solid legal grounds. prop 8 harder but kennedy will clear it up." >>> next the tug-of-war over the fiscal cliff. how much are democrats willing to give our entitlement cuts? we'll ask congressman elijah cummings that question. >>> the fight on capitol hill convinces a big powerball winner to claim his fortune now. you're watching "weekends with alex witt." [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. in...